I can remember Urban [Meyer], when he first got the Bowling Green job, we were at a coaches convention hospitality bar. He told me, ‘I’d like to run some of your offense.’ So he sent his whole staff for a week, we traded some ideas and so we always traded ideas.

One of the interesting facets I am anticipating; how well Mattison’s defense does against Urban’s offense over the next couple of years. You have to figure much of Meyer’s offense will be similar to Fla days, and if anyone knows any cracks, faults, or how to defend it, it’s the guy that practiced against it daily.

He is right though. Oregon will be the first to 70. I'm guessing somewhere around 70-3 halfway through the third quarter.

The first season struggles under Rodriguez, combined with a warp speed Oregon offense and a transition to the 3-3-5 is going to be seriously rough. I'd say Kelly will call off the dogs, but he doesn't seem like the merciful type.

The difference is that RichRod has a DC that can actually run the 3-3-5 and pretty sucessively looking at WVU's recent history. I don't know if it'll be fully functioning by the Oregon game, but I'd wager that it'll look better than it ever did at Michigan.

Mountaineers fans love Jeff Casteel, especially since he spurned RichRod when offered a position at Michigan.

I'd say Kelly will call off the dogs, but he doesn't seem like the merciful type.

You sound so confident that Chip Kelly will still be coaching in another month.

We have our own experience with Oregon showing no mercy. Clifton Brown, writing in the New York Times in September, 2007:

ANN ARBOR, Mich., Sept. 8 — The Michigan football team has fallen to a new low, looking as disjointed as a scattered jigsaw puzzle.

One week after the most embarrassing loss in the program’s history, the Wolverines were humbled again Saturday, with nowhere to hide before 109,733 at Michigan Stadium.

The final score — Oregon 39, Michigan 7 — did not fully reflect how one-sided this game was. Michigan’s defense was so inept, yielding 624 yards, that last week’s 34-32 home loss against Appalachian State, the two-time defending champion in Division I-AA, seemed somewhat less mystifying. Michigan’s defense tackled horribly Saturday, allowed huge plays, made mental mistakes and was manhandled at the line of scrimmage.

Could the Wolverines really have fallen so far, so fast? Last season, Michigan won its first 11 games and entered the regular-season finale against Ohio State with a chance to win the national title. But they lost that game, and then were beaten by Southern California in the Rose Bowl. After starting this season ranked No. 5 in the Associated Press preseason poll, they have suffered two psychologically damaging defeats.

Michigan Stadium, called the Big House, has become the Fun House for the opposition. Even before this latest humiliation, some Michigan supporters wanted Coach Lloyd Carr to be replaced. Now, Carr’s job status has become even more tenuous.

I distinctly remember beating Florida in Lloyd Carr's last game. I missed the rest of the season while I was backpacking in Tajikistan. The pictures never developed from that trip. It's almost like it never happened.

In addition to Arizona vs. Oregon, I think just about any Washington State game will be a good one to watch this year precisely because their defense sucks, while their offense might be scary (both to themselves and opponents).

Oregon and Arizona do not run the same offense. Oregon has to a large degree de-emphasized the QB as a rushing threat. They still recruit QBs with some running ability but do not ask them to carry the ball anywhere near as much as RR's QBs do. The great majority of their rushing yards come from the tailback position. Last year, Darron Thomas rushed for 206 yards and 3 TDs. Meawhile, he threw 33 TD passes. Oregon could be described as a hurry-up passing spread.

The success of every coach everywhere is recruit driven. Meyer inherited a lot of talent from Zook and had some great immediate success on the recruiting trail getting guys like Tebow, Harvin, and Spikes in his first full class (blue-chips who were fantastic players). That set him up for 5 years of success. After that first class things started to slip, he had some bad luck with Cam Newton leaving UF, and now we've seen a few mediocre seasons at UF both with and without Meyer.

Charlie Weis wasn't a good coach for two years, a terrible coach for one year, and a mediocre coach for two. Jim Harbaugh wasn't crappy for two years, pretty good for one, and awesome for another at Stanford. David Shaw and Larry Coker didn't have immediate success because they are awesome.

The best coaches in college football are the guys who can bring in a group of kids that ends up being a great team when they become juniors and seniors. Harbaugh is one of those guys. Mark Dantonio is one of those guys (did it at Cincinnati and at MSU). Rich Rodriguez is one of those guys (did it at WVU and here at Michigan). Nick Saban and Mike Leach are two of those guys, just dealing with different resources. If his actual scouting sense jives with the recruiting rankings, Brady Hoke will be one of those guys.

We really haven't seen much of what Meyer can do since he left his first two head coaching jobs after just two years. At Florida he had a great first class and then really fell off, and that came while recruiting with a lot of advantages (just coming off a national title, etc.). We'll just have to wait and see, but if past exeperience is any indicator most fans will have made up their mind long before we start to see the results.

I don't think you can discount what he did at Bowling Green and Utah just because he was only there two years each time. Both times he achieved immediate turnarounds with programs that didn't seem to be all that talented when he got there.

The question I have about him is, how much of his past success (and Rich Rodriguez's for that matter) was a function of his offense being new to college football at the time?

Obviously Meyer is a top notch coach, but he walked into good situations. Utah had gone 9-3 and won a bowl game, had a bad season, then went 8-4 and beat Pete Caroll and Carson Palmer in a bowl game, then had a bad season and the coach got fired. Concluding there wasn't any talent there without any actual knowledge of the team is kind of silly. Meyer inherited a quarterback who was the first pick in the NFL draft and is still an NFL starter. For all the shots he's taken and the struggles he's had in the league, most mid-level coaches would kill for Alex Smith on their college team. Omar Jacobs was a similar elite-level player for Bowling Green who Meyer didn't bring in (and they never even won their division in the MAC, so it isn't like that was some unstoppable team).

If those guys aren't there, his record isn't as good, that is just a fact. He deserves all kinds of credit for bringing in Tebow, and for initially bringing in Cam Newton, but his success at BGSU and Utah doesn't happen unless the ground work is in place. Giving a coach credit for anything he does in his first two years is a recipe for giving unqualified slobs a 10 year contract.

[Arizona A.D.] Byrne discussed the job with former Florida coach Urban Meyer, who told him, "If you hire Rich Rodriguez, you're getting one of the five greatest minds in college football. That would be an incredible hire for the University of Arizona."

But I think this post is spot-on. That said, Hoke seems to be bringing equally talented and character-worthy gentlemen onto our roster, so the success will probably continue.

In the end, I'm just glad we current have an offensive coordinator who is able to mesh the old players with the new. Let's hope that can continue in the post-Robinson years to come, when we might -really- feel the transitional aches and pains.

I've been a huge Borges fan since long before we hired him. Brady Hoke is at worst a fantastic program figurehead and a super persuasive recruiter. It will be a while (fortunately for him) before his players have to carry the load, but there isn't any reason for pessimism at this point. If it works out half as well as our fanbase is assuming it will, there will be nothing but positives for Michigan.

At that point, why are the people who bitched and moaned that we were doomed and our players were all too small for the B1G and you couldn't win with dreadlocked troublemakers from Florida and that the departure of players buried on the depth chart was going to kill us (people who don't bat an eyelash when someone leaves the program now), especially in a "gimmicky" offense where the QB maybe runs the ball from time to time (like for over 1,000 yards with 16 TDs like last year) still so mad?

hen is our dumbass fanbase going to come to grips with the fact that the guy did an AMAZING job here after walking into an absolute shitstorm? It doesn't hurt to be grateful.

This is so over-the-top, I don't know if it's intended to be serious or sarcasm. If 15-22 and the three worst defenses in school history constitute an "amazing job," wow . . . you're pretty out there.

If you want to argue that his performance here was not indicative of his true potential, OK. But this is just ridiculous. I don't think he was bad at everything. I'm happy he brought in Denard Robinson, obviously. But his management of the defense was catastrophic and to suggest that he is somehow responsible for the 2011 turnaround in that area is nuts (and frankly, disrespectful of the current staff). The guy has moved on to a new job. You do not have to feel compelled to defend his internet honor with such gusto.

There's that whole hiring, motivating, recruiting people that will stay for a few years, recruiting linemen, recruiting linebackers, adjusting to personel, adjusting to the changing game in general, and consolidating the base behind being a good college football coach. Give it up Section 1. The guy was a dud who could draw some mean Xs and Os. The rest of the game adjusted (see: chip Kelly's spread) and left RR still getting ink on his sleeve from the overhead projector while everyone else moved on to power point.

So, our recruiting sucked while Rodriguez was here? We're still sticking to that ridiculous argument even after it is completely refuted on the field? I guess we magically went 11-2 last year. I guess Lewan, Schofield, Barnum, Omameh, Mealer, Ryan, Roh, Campbell, Ash, Black, Beyer, Washington, Morgan, Hawthorne, and Cam Gordon all don't exist?

Boy, I don't know how we ever ended up with a preseason top-10 ranking with all those non-existent losers and the most productive offensive player in school history and a 1,000 yard RB, and the single game UM record holder for receiving yards, and...

I bet we really suck balls this year since, you know, just about everyone on the team was recruited by that awful coach and then they all left the program so we probably won't even be able to field a squad this year. Fuck that guy for ruining Michigan football!

Our recruiting SUCKED while RR was here. There are three undisputable facts:

1) We have depth problems at non-niche positions, such as offensive line, defensive line, linebacker and wide receiver. For the record, that's over half of the positions on the field....on both sides of the ball.

2) You only pointed to 15 recruits over the course of 3 years.

3) Despite only pointing out 15 recruits over 3 years, about half of them are average Big 10 players. Given that we are at Michigan, you'd think the bar would be a bit higher.

Finally, an opinion: Last year's team tremendously overachieved relative to the prior year. I know we will never be able to convince you of this, but one year of aging doesnt take you from getting physically dominated in your 6 losses to going 11-2 with 2 coinflip losses.

4) Two other things are almost fatal to high-level recruiting. One is any possibility of a coaching change that is rumored/threatened/whispered. And really; what top-level recruit would want to commit to a program not knowing who the coach might be? The second is the presence of an NCAA investigation and the threat of sanctions. Those things clearly dinged Ohio State's recruiting to some extent, and Penn State's recruting to a catastrophic extent.

Perahps the Free Press could do an in-depth story on that subject some day.

But the uncertainty thing would only hurt the 2011 class. There were no concerns of coach firing, bowl bans, etc with those first two full recruiting classes, as shown by those class' relatively high rankings. He brought in some nice athletes, just apparently a bunch without proper positions, low upside, or low propensity to sit and stay awhile.

Im only responding to Purple who thinks that RR was a great recruiter. He brought in some recruiting website stars, but thats it. The verdict is still out on Hoke, but given his ability to plug gaping holes in a hurry, and has them all on the same page saying the right things, his recruiting seems to be top notch.

Since the end of August, 2009, Michigan was shoved onto the national news over allegations of abusive practice-time overages, and the frankly phony stories/rumors/allegations as to why Justin Boren left. The NCAA was investigating Michigan before the end of September that year.

Is that he was still able to get a lot of players with a lot of options. In this sense, I am commending his recruiting. If that was in spite of this drastic uncertainty, then all the power to him. Nevertheless, the allocation of positions sucked something awful and a lot of those star guys aren't even here any more (and for the record, nobody any good left because Hoke was here rather than RR).

While semi off topic Section 1, if you arent fortunate enough to be around players when they privately discuss their true feelings about Hoke vs. RR, then take your head out of the sand and see how the players speak about the derp in public.

Give it up Section 1. The guy was a dud who could draw some mean Xs and Os. The rest of the game adjusted (see: chip Kelly's spread) and left RR still getting ink on his sleeve from the overhead projector while everyone else moved on to power point.

All that I did was to quote Urban Meyer. I posted a single quote. Did you get that?

Did you want to dig out some other quote, where I proposed to tell people how to think about the details of coaching techniques? Good luck finding one of those. You will find plenty of my posts where I specifically remove myself form those debates.

Anyway, thanks to you Cigol, for bringing me into this so that I could hammer you on this point for everyone's benefit. And thanks to Purple Stuff, one of the best MGoBloggers there is.

When I first did this in 1991, it was a blank slate. I didn’t have a point of reference so we studied run and shoot tapes.

I'm not really buying that "blank slate" thing ... from what I can gather, there's been no revolutionary development in football in decades. Everything is built upon what came before.

UofA's first game is versus Toledo here in Tucson, 7:30pm. I'll be watching Michigan, of course ... but it'll be interesting to see how UofA fares. September 22nd ... the Wildcats go north to Oregon ...

Definitely agree that everything builds on prior knowledge, but there are leaps forward that change the game and force everyone else to adapt and possibly incorporate some of what is changing. The wishbone was a big change. Joe Tiller's passing game at Purdue was a big change, which came on the heels of the run&shoot stuff at Houston and led to the Leach stuff at TTU. Meyer's offense incorporating triple option principles and a vertical passing attack melted people's faces, but was fairly reminiscent of what Georgia Tech did with Joe Hamilton under O'Leary/Friedgen (though they operated more under center IIRC).

There are also timeless principles. If your QB can run, offense gets a whole lot easier, no matter what kind of strategy you employ. Tommy Frazier or Vince Young or Steve Young or Pat White or Denard Robinson all make the playcaller's job easier, no matter how the team lines up or what play is called.

Rodriguez will struggle this year, as he always does, if for no other reason than learning the spread and the 3-3-5 always takes time. Fortunately for him, Arizona is patient. There's no question the guy is an offensive genius, and I think that Oregon-Arizona games are going to be real exciting in about 3 years.